Q
Hey, I just read your post about the TFM article and their critique of the "Drop the I-word" campaign. I went into the article ready to be upset and condemn the TFM article, but oddly enough I mostly agreed with his standpoint. I kinda was just interested in your comments about the article/campaign just for perspective.
A

there’s a lot to be said about this article and i was exhausted half way through reading it because it’s a lot of the same recycled garbage i’ve seen in anti-immigrant language, but here ya go:

  • off the bat, i hate the condescending, dismissive tone. right in the beginning paragraph, the author reduces the call to ban the i-word as students whining for attention rather than something that has caused/still does cause serious psychological harm and trauma to undocumented immigrants.
  • the appointing of Janet Napolitano as the UC system president is merely a footnote in the article when it is a legitimate concern of undocumented students. clearly, this author doesn’t realize how many immigrant families have been torn apart under Napolitano. why WOULDN’T undocumented youth be angry about this and actively work to change the rhetoric surrounding undocumented immigrants on their campus?
  • look, i’m all for the first amendment but not when it’s being used to protect hateful, damaging speech. AND IT IS HATEFUL AND DAMAGING whether he wants to believe it or not. the author can use the I-Word all he wants just as much as i can explain why it’s fucked up.
  • the comparison that TFM “dehumanizes Frat Boys” is essentially equal to using the I-Word is laughable and ridiculous. is TFM not run by said frat boys? do they not refer to this blog as “satire”? i could be wrong, but most frat guys i know pretty much shit their pants if someone non-Greek spoke ill of Greek life. there is nothing satirical about referring to someone as “illegal”, ESPECIALLY if you don’t know shit about being undocumented so just sit down and stop.
  • "Calling these people undocumented or unauthorized instead of illegal does little, if anything, to make them less dehumanized." maaaaan shut the fuck up HOW ABOUT IT RESPECTS OUR WISH TO BE REFERRED TO AS SOMETHING THAT MORE ACCURATELY REPRESENTS THEIR SITUATION? simply fucking put, how about it respects our wish to be identified the way we want to be identified? how about when we say "hey i think this word is dehumanizing and reduces my existence down to my immigration status and that’s really uncool and is hurtful to me and my family and my community can you not say it?" you shut the fuck up and actually listen?
  • calling a group “undocumented” as opposed to the I-word doesn’t make us faceless. what the fuck are you talking about? there are TONS OF FACES in the immigration movement. maybe they’re faceless to you because your mind quickly shifts to a caricature of who undocumented immigrants are. this argument is also fucking dumb because how does using the I-Word make us not faceless but “undocumented” or “unauthorized” does?
  • REALLY? IS THREE EXTRA SYLLABLES THAT FUCKING DIFFICULT?
  • fucking WOW at trying to ban the I-Word being seen as alienating people. you know what also alienates people? THE I-WORD
  • YEAH shame on UCLA for trying to create a safe, inclusive environment for their undocumented students. how dare they? why can’t they be like MY university and not utter a goddamn word when hateful speech is publicly used to target undocumented students through vandalizing posters for Chicago’s Coming Out of the Shadows event and ripping down a photo exhibition of undocumented students in the middle of the night?
  • "illegal doesn’t automatically mean bad" actually many people who still use it knowing we, time & time again, have said we don’t like it DO mean it in a bad way
  • says “illegal is legally inaccurate” is just arguing semantics after previously pulling out a wikipedia definition of “illegal immigrant” to prove it’s not racially derogatory. who’s arguing semantics now?
  • without actually dissecting that group and highlighting their individuality and humanity…” because you did such a good job at this? your constant use of the I-Word proves, whether you like it or not, that you don’t give a shit about our humanity. did you happen to talk to undocumented youth on the UCLA campus about their thoughts on this? did you talk to any undocumented immigrants at all before you wrote this? go on the internet and search for any immigrants rights rally footage and i guarantee the likelihood of you hearing people refer to themselves as “undocumented”, “unauthorized” or “without papers” is much higher than the I-word. also, who the hell are you to dictate how we identify ourselves? and the UC system should “dissect the group” and highlight individuality & humanity? not here for your good immigrant vs bad immigrant respectability politics bullshit
  • AGAIN. THE IMMIGRANTS RIGHTS MOVEMENT IS. NOT. FACELESS.
  • "Illegal isn’t a racial term." it actually is
  • "By ignoring the fact that people other than minorities can be illegal immigrants, the UCLA student government is fueling racial profiling as much as anyone else.” does UCLA student government ignore this though? do they explicitly single out certain racial/ethnic groups as being undocumented? because from what i’ve seen, they haven’t. so bye.
  • ENJOY